3 ms·

We have a long way to go, remember we're 2 years away from self driving car since 2010. AGI is always coming "in a decade or so" since the 70s Nothing says we

We have a long way to go, remember we're 2 years away from self driving car since 2010. AGI is always coming "in a decade or so" since the 70s Nothing says we're on a path to a paradigm shift given the current approach

kilgnad 4y ago
>AGI is always coming "in a decade or so" since the 70s This whole thing is no longer relevant because we just hit certain inflection points that weren't relevant in the past. AI can now code, it can craft essays and it can lie. In fact nobody talks about this but AI can already passed the turing test. People weren't saying AGI would come out in the next decade or so, they were saying AI would pass the turing test in the next decade or so. Well.... it passed it. Yet here we are setting new goal markers and downplaying the milestone. I think if you can't acknowledge the the possibility that AI could take over our jobs within our lifetimes, then I think you're not being honest with yourself. Not saying that it will, but the possibility given the milestones surpassed by AI in the last decade... indicate that it could Must be acknowledged.
- lm28469 4y ago
  > we just hit certain inflection points Have we ? People keep saying that every few years, crypto, web3, self driving cars, &c. > AI can now code, it can craft essays and it can lie. Talking about being honest, this is mostly wrong and you know it. It can write some snippets of code for it was trained on, sometimes even manually so [0], its essays sound like SEO optimised gibberish that very often are actually wrong on many accounts. It cannot lie as it doesn't even know what truth is, it has no idea of what is a fact is It's not going to write an award winning book or a production read software, not even close I'd recommend you dig into how these current AIs work, there is a lot of overhype and people not understanding what they're talking about. In its current state it's a very well polished and convincing probability machine, it has no understanding, no memory, &c. We didn't hit a magical inflection point, don't expect exponential progress from now on, this isn't AGI, not even close, their developers are not even attempting to pretend it is anything like that. And don't get me wrong, they're amazing and can be used for many things, they just aren't skynet [0] https://www.zdnet.com/article/openai-is-hiring-developers-to-make-chatgpt-better-at-coding/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/openai-is-hiring-developers-to...
  - CuriouslyC 4y ago
    "Understanding" is meaningless. All that matters is "does the model produce good output?" People are excited about AI now because we've crossed over boundary with generative models, allowing them to be used in much more interesting ways. Previous machine learning applications were mostly regression and classification problems in fancy clothing. ChatGPT is the "Newcomen engine" moment for AI. We've still got the AI equivalent of railroads, cars and jets in our future. There's absolutely zero chance that as we evolve these models and link them together it isn't transformative in the way we do work and run society.
  - kilgnad 4y ago
    I work with people who directly train LLMs. I can assure you if you think these things are probability machines, you have not played with it thoroughly. Alexa or cortana or even GPT-3 are more like probability generators. ChatGPT is different. From one angle yes it is a probability machine. But from that angle, EVEN your own human brain is a probability machine as well. They are both neural nets. It understands you. Read this to the end: https://www.engraved.blog/building-a-virtual-machine-inside/ https://www.engraved.blog/building-a-virtual-machine-inside/ All the tasks it did in that article. Not just what it did initially but all the way to the ending shows that chatGPT understands you. It IS an inflection point. You just missed it. You're probably dismissing it because you've been reading the same old hype over and over again without realizing something different came out with chatGPT.
    - lm28469 4y ago
      > shows that chatGPT understands you. Yes, like your dog understand you when you call his name, but not when you describe him how to go to the nearest post office by showing him a map. As much as you want it to believe it's just not happening, because it's physically not possible for it to happen I can also write an article about the Joys of ChatGPT, I just have to eliminate the garbage I get about 50% of the time, then it's a wonderful machine for sure. Try it yourself btw, most of the examples don't work, because you don't see the hours of prompting used to get it where they want it to get, in my example it would be like using a map to walk your dog to the post office and pretend your dog did it by itself by taking step by step images of your dog next to the map at every direction change. Damn I feel like very smart people act as gullible as 13 years old tiktokers learning "how to burn 5kg of fat a week by eating leeks"
- smusamashah 4y ago
  I just had a thought that when we were first introduced to home computers, or when we first got a modern operating system that anyone could use, or when we first got mobile phones, or home internet or, to end the examples, first self driving car, were the reactions same? How well did we extrapolate that to next decade and are we there now? If no, then I guess this new AI stuff will not explode as much as we think but will only become a part of our daily lives (like phones or automatic cars?) while still struggling for new highs. Bottleneck could be computation, or may be lack of coherency or sensibility on a larger and larger scales. What you seem to be ignoring here is that none of these text, image and video generation models can distinguish between common sense and non-sense/BS. And that's what they end up generating.
cjg 4y ago
> remember we're 2 years away from self driving car since 2010 Depending on how you define that milestone, we are already there. There are multiple companies offering self-driving cars to the public in multiple cities. I'd count that as a success.
- lm28469 4y ago
  > Depending on how you define that milestone, we are already there. My definition is definitely not "only on straight wide and sunny Californian roads and sometimes crashing full speed into a stopped vehicle". Remember that in 2014 Uber was talking about buying 500 000 fully autonomous teslas "by 2020", they bought 0, and they're still not anywhere close to autonomous.
detrites 4y ago
> We have a long way to go Well maybe we would. But, we're not doing this alone. We could move the goalposts again but AI already passed the tests we made for it. This paradigm shift's happened already; present AI is passing undetected versus a human in a rapidly growing list of highly skilled and specialised tasks. When the list comes to contain "improving AI" it's game over.
- lm28469 4y ago
  > present AI is passing AIs with an 's', it's not a single entity, it's multiple completely unrelated tools, of course if you put them under the same individual "AI" name it seems amazing, that's what medias and non tech people do The problem is that there is still no intelligence, hence no paradigm shift, just like a hammer and a screw driver won't build a house, even if you have ten of them, and even if they're very fancy ones Read what people said about "AI" when it learned to play chess, it sounds exactly like a lot of comments on GPT today > present AI is passing undetected versus a human in a rapidly growing list of highly skilled and specialised tasks. I've also witnessed the opposite, people start questioning generic art and mediocre articles, asking if they're AI generated
  - detrites 4y ago
    > AIs with an 's', it's not a single entity, it's multiple completely unrelated tools, of course if you put them under the same individual "AI" name it seems amazing What a bizarre, nonsensical argument. By that logic, the current state of a technology could not legitimately be considered "amazing" if any subset of it is not "amazing". Utter nonsense. Regardless, I didn't even claim it was "amazing". That's your introduction. What I claimed was that current AI technology passes tests that assess whether or not it is "intelligence". In AI, that's the de facto paradigm shift.
    - lm28469 4y ago
      > current AI technology passes tests that assess whether or not it is "intelligence". An "ai" also passed the Turing test in 2014, nothing happened, the world is still the same, we still orbit the sun, water is still wet, no paradigm shift. What tests are you referencing ? How do they prove intelligence ? Where is the paradigm shift ? do you know what a paradigm shift is ? If there was an AI paradigm shift it happened already, more than a decade ago: https://content.iospress.com/articles/ai-communications/aic582 https://content.iospress.com/articles/ai-communications/aic5... what happened since is incremental progress

kilgnad 4y ago

>AGI is always coming "in a decade or so" since the 70s This whole thing is no longer relevant because we just hit certain inflection points that weren't relevant in the past. AI can now code, it can craft essays and it can lie. In fact nobody talks about this but AI can already passed the turing test. People weren't saying AGI would come out in the next decade or so, they were saying AI would pass the turing test in the next decade or so. Well.... it passed it. Yet here we are setting new goal markers and downplaying the milestone. I think if you can't acknowledge the the possibility that AI could take over our jobs within our lifetimes, then I think you're not being honest with yourself. Not saying that it will, but the possibility given the milestones surpassed by AI in the last decade... indicate that it could Must be acknowledged.

lm28469 4y ago
> we just hit certain inflection points Have we ? People keep saying that every few years, crypto, web3, self driving cars, &c. > AI can now code, it can craft essays and it can lie. Talking about being honest, this is mostly wrong and you know it. It can write some snippets of code for it was trained on, sometimes even manually so [0], its essays sound like SEO optimised gibberish that very often are actually wrong on many accounts. It cannot lie as it doesn't even know what truth is, it has no idea of what is a fact is It's not going to write an award winning book or a production read software, not even close I'd recommend you dig into how these current AIs work, there is a lot of overhype and people not understanding what they're talking about. In its current state it's a very well polished and convincing probability machine, it has no understanding, no memory, &c. We didn't hit a magical inflection point, don't expect exponential progress from now on, this isn't AGI, not even close, their developers are not even attempting to pretend it is anything like that. And don't get me wrong, they're amazing and can be used for many things, they just aren't skynet [0] https://www.zdnet.com/article/openai-is-hiring-developers-to-make-chatgpt-better-at-coding/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/openai-is-hiring-developers-to...
- CuriouslyC 4y ago
  "Understanding" is meaningless. All that matters is "does the model produce good output?" People are excited about AI now because we've crossed over boundary with generative models, allowing them to be used in much more interesting ways. Previous machine learning applications were mostly regression and classification problems in fancy clothing. ChatGPT is the "Newcomen engine" moment for AI. We've still got the AI equivalent of railroads, cars and jets in our future. There's absolutely zero chance that as we evolve these models and link them together it isn't transformative in the way we do work and run society.
- kilgnad 4y ago
  I work with people who directly train LLMs. I can assure you if you think these things are probability machines, you have not played with it thoroughly. Alexa or cortana or even GPT-3 are more like probability generators. ChatGPT is different. From one angle yes it is a probability machine. But from that angle, EVEN your own human brain is a probability machine as well. They are both neural nets. It understands you. Read this to the end: https://www.engraved.blog/building-a-virtual-machine-inside/ https://www.engraved.blog/building-a-virtual-machine-inside/ All the tasks it did in that article. Not just what it did initially but all the way to the ending shows that chatGPT understands you. It IS an inflection point. You just missed it. You're probably dismissing it because you've been reading the same old hype over and over again without realizing something different came out with chatGPT.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    > shows that chatGPT understands you. Yes, like your dog understand you when you call his name, but not when you describe him how to go to the nearest post office by showing him a map. As much as you want it to believe it's just not happening, because it's physically not possible for it to happen I can also write an article about the Joys of ChatGPT, I just have to eliminate the garbage I get about 50% of the time, then it's a wonderful machine for sure. Try it yourself btw, most of the examples don't work, because you don't see the hours of prompting used to get it where they want it to get, in my example it would be like using a map to walk your dog to the post office and pretend your dog did it by itself by taking step by step images of your dog next to the map at every direction change. Damn I feel like very smart people act as gullible as 13 years old tiktokers learning "how to burn 5kg of fat a week by eating leeks"
smusamashah 4y ago
I just had a thought that when we were first introduced to home computers, or when we first got a modern operating system that anyone could use, or when we first got mobile phones, or home internet or, to end the examples, first self driving car, were the reactions same? How well did we extrapolate that to next decade and are we there now? If no, then I guess this new AI stuff will not explode as much as we think but will only become a part of our daily lives (like phones or automatic cars?) while still struggling for new highs. Bottleneck could be computation, or may be lack of coherency or sensibility on a larger and larger scales. What you seem to be ignoring here is that none of these text, image and video generation models can distinguish between common sense and non-sense/BS. And that's what they end up generating.

cjg 4y ago

> remember we're 2 years away from self driving car since 2010 Depending on how you define that milestone, we are already there. There are multiple companies offering self-driving cars to the public in multiple cities. I'd count that as a success.

lm28469 4y ago
> Depending on how you define that milestone, we are already there. My definition is definitely not "only on straight wide and sunny Californian roads and sometimes crashing full speed into a stopped vehicle". Remember that in 2014 Uber was talking about buying 500 000 fully autonomous teslas "by 2020", they bought 0, and they're still not anywhere close to autonomous.

detrites 4y ago

> We have a long way to go Well maybe we would. But, we're not doing this alone. We could move the goalposts again but AI already passed the tests we made for it. This paradigm shift's happened already; present AI is passing undetected versus a human in a rapidly growing list of highly skilled and specialised tasks. When the list comes to contain "improving AI" it's game over.

lm28469 4y ago
> present AI is passing AIs with an 's', it's not a single entity, it's multiple completely unrelated tools, of course if you put them under the same individual "AI" name it seems amazing, that's what medias and non tech people do The problem is that there is still no intelligence, hence no paradigm shift, just like a hammer and a screw driver won't build a house, even if you have ten of them, and even if they're very fancy ones Read what people said about "AI" when it learned to play chess, it sounds exactly like a lot of comments on GPT today > present AI is passing undetected versus a human in a rapidly growing list of highly skilled and specialised tasks. I've also witnessed the opposite, people start questioning generic art and mediocre articles, asking if they're AI generated
- detrites 4y ago
  > AIs with an 's', it's not a single entity, it's multiple completely unrelated tools, of course if you put them under the same individual "AI" name it seems amazing What a bizarre, nonsensical argument. By that logic, the current state of a technology could not legitimately be considered "amazing" if any subset of it is not "amazing". Utter nonsense. Regardless, I didn't even claim it was "amazing". That's your introduction. What I claimed was that current AI technology passes tests that assess whether or not it is "intelligence". In AI, that's the de facto paradigm shift.
  - lm28469 4y ago
    > current AI technology passes tests that assess whether or not it is "intelligence". An "ai" also passed the Turing test in 2014, nothing happened, the world is still the same, we still orbit the sun, water is still wet, no paradigm shift. What tests are you referencing ? How do they prove intelligence ? Where is the paradigm shift ? do you know what a paradigm shift is ? If there was an AI paradigm shift it happened already, more than a decade ago: https://content.iospress.com/articles/ai-communications/aic582 https://content.iospress.com/articles/ai-communications/aic5... what happened since is incremental progress